Leadership training spends a lot of time on what makes a good decision, and almost no time on a genuinely more useful question: who should actually be involved in making it. In this episode, Andrew and Hannah dig into Victor Vroom and Philip Yetton's 1973 model, and the finding that leaders who default to one consistent decision-making style — always deciding alone, always consulting, always seeking consensus — get measurably worse outcomes than leaders who match the process to the specific situation.
We break down the spectrum of approaches, from deciding alone with existing information to full group consensus, and the diagnostic questions that actually determine which fits: how much decision quality matters, whether the leader already has enough information, whether the team's genuine buy-in is required for the decision to actually work, and whether the problem is structured or genuinely ambiguous.
We explore the model's central, practical finding: over-consulting a decision that could have been made quickly alone wastes time for nothing, while under-consulting a decision that needs real buy-in can sink even a technically correct answer during implementation. We also cover the later refinement adding time pressure and the developmental value of involving a team even when it isn't strictly required. We close on why a decision-making style that built trust in one situation can be exactly the wrong choice in the next.
Speak Leadership explores the many forms and dialects of leadership.
Podden och tillhörande omslagsbild på den här sidan tillhör
Speak Leadership Team. Innehållet i podden är skapat av Speak Leadership Team och inte av,
eller tillsammans med, Poddtoppen.